Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:ChatGPT has shown the ability to answer clinical questions in general medicine but may be constrained by the specialized nature of kidney transplantation. Thus, it is important to explore how ChatGPT can be used in kidney transplantation and how its knowledge compares to human respondents. METHODS:We prompted ChatGPT versions 3.5, 4, and 4 Visual (4 V) with 12 multiple-choice questions related to six kidney transplant cases from 2013 to 2015 American Society of Nephrology (ASN) fellowship program quizzes. We compared the performance of ChatGPT with US nephrology fellowship program directors, nephrology fellows, and the audience of the ASN's annual Kidney Week meeting. RESULTS:Overall, ChatGPT 4 V correctly answered 10 out of 12 questions, showing a performance level comparable to nephrology fellows (group majority correctly answered 9 of 12 questions) and training program directors (11 of 12). This surpassed ChatGPT 4 (7 of 12 correct) and 3.5 (5 of 12). All three ChatGPT versions failed to correctly answer questions where the consensus among human respondents was low. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Each iterative version of ChatGPT performed better than the prior version, with version 4 V achieving performance on par with nephrology fellows and training program directors. While it shows promise in understanding and answering kidney transplantation questions, ChatGPT should be seen as a complementary tool to human expertise rather than a replacement.

BACKGROUND:Since February 2020, exception points have been allocated equivalent to the median model for end-stage liver disease at transplant within 250 nautical miles of the transplant center (MMaT/250). We compared transplant rate and waitlist mortality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exception, non-HCC exception, and non-exception candidates to determine whether MMaT/250 advantages (or disadvantages) exception candidates. METHODS:Using Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients data, we identified 23 686 adult, first-time, active, deceased donor liver transplant (DDLT) candidates between February 4, 2020, and February 3, 2022. We compared DDLT rates using Cox regression, and waitlist mortality/dropout using competing risks regression in non-exception versus HCC versus non-HCC candidates. RESULTS:Within 24 mo of study entry, 58.4% of non-exception candidates received DDLT, compared with 57.8% for HCC candidates and 70.5% for non-HCC candidates. After adjustment, HCC candidates had 27% lower DDLT rate (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.680.730.77) compared with non-exception candidates. However, waitlist mortality for HCC was comparable to non-exception candidates (adjusted subhazard ratio [asHR] = 0.931.031.15). Non-HCC candidates with pulmonary complications of cirrhosis or cholangiocarcinoma had substantially higher risk of waitlist mortality compared with non-exception candidates (asHR = 1.271.702.29 for pulmonary complications of cirrhosis, 1.352.043.07 for cholangiocarcinoma). The same was not true of non-HCC candidates with exceptions for other reasons (asHR = 0.540.881.44). CONCLUSIONS:Under MMaT/250, HCC, and non-exception candidates have comparable risks of dying before receiving liver transplant, despite lower transplant rates for HCC. However, non-HCC candidates with pulmonary complications of cirrhosis or cholangiocarcinoma have substantially higher risk of dying before receiving liver transplant; these candidates may merit increased allocation priority.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Obesogenic medications are a putative contributor to the obesity epidemic. While 20% of adults take ≥1 obesogenic medication, the proportion in the end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) population-a group enriched for cardiometabolic complications-is unknown. Obesogenic medications may contribute to obesity and hamper weight loss efforts to achieve transplant listing. METHODS:Using 2017-2020 USRDS and Medicare claims, patients were identified as taking obesogenic medications if prescribed anticonvulsants, antidepressants, antidiabetics, anti-inflammatories, antipsychotics, and/or antihypertensives known to cause weight gain for ≥30 days in their first hemodialysis year. Ordinal logistic and Cox regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting were used to quantify obesogenic medications' association with body mass index (BMI) and listing, respectively. RESULTS:Among 271 401 hemodialysis initiates, 63.5% took ≥1 obesogenic medication. For those in underweight, normal weight, overweight, and class I, II, and III categories, 54.3%, 58.4%, 63.1%, 66.5%, 68.6%, and 68.8% took ≥1, respectively. Number of obesogenic medications was associated with increased BMI; use of one was associated with 13% increased odds of higher BMI (aOR [adjusted odds ratio] 1.14; 95%CI: 1.13-1.16; p < 0.001), use of three was associated with a 55% increase (aOR 1.55; 95%CI: 1.53-1.57; p < 0.001). Any use was associated with 6% lower odds of transplant listing (aHR [adjusted hazard ratio] 0.94; 95%CI: 0.92-0.96; p < 0.001). Within each BMI category, obesogenic medication use was associated with lower listing likelihood. CONCLUSIONS:Obesogenic medication use is common in ESKD patients-particularly those with obesity-and is associated with lower listing likelihood. Whenever possible, non-obesogenic alternatives should be chosen for ESKD patients attempting weight loss to achieve transplant listing.

Kidney transplantation from blood type A2/A2B donors to type B recipients (A2→B) has increased dramatically under the current Kidney Allocation System (KAS). Among living donor transplant recipients, A2-incompatible transplants are associated with an increased risk of all-cause and death-censored graft failure. In light of this, we used SRTR data from 12/2014-6/2022 to evaluate the association between A2→B listing and time to deceased donor kidney transplantation (DDKT) and post-DDKT outcomes for A2→B recipients. Among 53,409 type B waitlist registrants, only 12.6% were listed as eligible to accept A2→B offers ("A2-eligible"). 1-/3-/5-year DDKT rates were 32.1%/61.4%/72.1% among A2-eligible candidates and 14.1%/29.9%/44.1% among A2-ineligible candidates, with the former experiencing a 133% higher rate of DDKT (Cox weighted HR = _2.192.33_2.47; p<0.001). The 7-year adjusted mortality was comparable between A2→B and B-ABOc (type B/O donors to B recipients) recipients (wHR _0.780.94_1.13, p=0.5). Moreover, there was no difference between A2→B vs. B-ABOc DDKT recipients with regards to death-censored graft failure (wHR _0.771.00_1.29, p>0.9) or all-cause graft loss (wHR _0.820.96_1.12, p=0.6). Following its broader adoption since the implementation of KAS, A2→B DDKT appears to be a safe and effective transplant modality for eligible candidates. As such, A2→B listing for eligible type B candidates should be expanded.

INTRODUCTION:Thoracoabdominal normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) following cardiac death is an emerging multivisceral organ procurement technique. Recent national studies on outcomes of presumptive TA-NRP-procured organs are limited by potential misclassification since TA-NRP is not differentiated from donation after cardiac death (DCD) in registry data. METHODS:We studied 22 donors whose designees consented to TA-NRP and organ procurement performed at our institution between January 20, 2020 and July 3, 2022. We identified these donors in SRTR to describe organ utilization and recipient outcomes and compared them to recipients of traditional DCD (tDCD) and donation after brain death (DBD) organs during the same timeframe. RESULTS:All 22 donors progressed to cardiac arrest and underwent TA-NRP followed by heart, lung, kidney, and/or liver procurement. Median donor age was 41 years, 55% had anoxic brain injury, 45% were hypertensive, 0% were diabetic, and median kidney donor profile index was 40%. TA-NRP utilization was high across all organ types (88%-100%), with a higher percentage of kidneys procured via TA-NRP compared to tDCD (88% vs. 72%, p = .02). Recipient and graft survival ranged from 89% to 100% and were comparable to tDCD and DBD recipients (p ≥ .2). Delayed graft function was lower for kidneys procured from TA-NRP compared to tDCD donors (27% vs. 44%, p = .045). CONCLUSION:Procurement from TA-NRP donors yielded high organ utilization, with outcomes comparable to tDCD and DBD recipients across organ types. Further large-scale study of TA-NRP donors, facilitated by its capture in the national registry, will be critical to fully understand its impact as an organ procurement technique.

BACKGROUND:Frailty is associated with poor outcomes in surgical patients including kidney transplant recipients. Transplant centers that measure frailty have better pre- and post-operative outcomes. However, clinical utility of existing tools is low due to time constraints. To address this major barrier to implementation in the pre-operative evaluation of patients, we developed an abridged frailty phenotype. METHODS:The abridged frailty phenotype was developed by simplifying the 5 Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) components in a two-center prospective cohort of 3,220 kidney transplant candidates and tested for efficiency (time to completion) in 20 candidates evaluation (1/2009-3/2020). We examined area under curve (AUC) and Cohen's kappa agreement to compare the abridged assessment with the PFP. We compared waitlist mortality risk (competing risks models) by frailty using the PFP and abridged assessment, respectively. Model discrimination was assessed using Harrell's C-statistic. RESULTS:Of 3,220 candidates, the PFP and abridged assessment identified 23.8% and 27.4% candidates as frail, respectively. The abridged frailty phenotype had substantial agreement (kappa=0.69, 95%CI:0.66-0.71) and excellent discrimination (area under the curve=0.861). Among 20 patients at evaluation, abridged assessment took 5-7 minutes to complete. The PFP and abridged assessment had similar associations with waitlist mortality (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]=1.62, 95%CI:1.26-2.08 vs. SHR=1.70, 95%CI:1.33-2.16) and comparable mortality discrimination (p=0.51). CONCLUSIONS:The abridged assessment is an efficient and valid way to identify frailty. It predicts waitlist mortality without sacrificing discrimination. Surgical departments should consider utilizing the abridged assessment to evaluate frailty in patients when time is limited.

Ureteral strictures are a common and often challenging complication of renal transplantation. The use of single-port (SP) robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery is a novel approach in the management of these patients. Here we describe 3 patients with stricture of the transplant ureter causing hydronephrosis and allograft dysfunction, whose ureteral reconstructions were successfully performed using the SP robotic-assisted laparoscopic approach. Two patients underwent transplant-to-native ureteroureterostomy and 1 patient underwent ureteroneocystostomy. We demonstrate that the use of concurrent ureteroscopy and near-infrared fluorescence enables safe and rapid identification of native and transplant ureters. In addition, side-to-side anastomosis of transplant-to-native ureters allows for preservation of ureteral vasculature. In this limited series, the SP robotic platform demonstrates great promise in simplifying and streamlining our approach to ureteral strictures in this patient population.

BACKGROUND:Understanding immunogenicity and alloimmune risk following severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in kidney transplant recipients is imperative to understanding the correlates of protection and to inform clinical guidelines. METHODS:We studied 50 kidney transplant recipients following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and quantified their anti-spike protein antibody, donor-derived cell-free DNA (dd-cfDNA), gene expression profiling (GEP), and alloantibody formation. RESULTS:Participants were stratified using nucleocapsid testing as either SARS-CoV-2-naïve or experienced prior to vaccination. One of 34 (3%) SARS-CoV-2 naïve participants developed anti-spike protein antibodies. In contrast, the odds ratio for the association of a prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection with vaccine response was 18.3 (95% confidence interval 3.2, 105.0, p < 0.01). Pre- and post-vaccination levels did not change for median dd-cfDNA (0.23% vs. 0.21% respectively, p = 0.13), GEP scores (9.85 vs. 10.4 respectively, p = 0.45), calculated panel reactive antibody, de-novo donor specific antibody status, or estimated glomerular filtration rate. CONCLUSIONS:SARS-CoV-2 vaccines do not appear to trigger alloimmunity in kidney transplant recipients. The degree of vaccine immunogenicity was associated most strongly with a prior history of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:The deceased donor organ pool has broadened beyond young, otherwise healthy head trauma victims. But an abundance of donated organs only benefits patients if they are accepted, expeditiously transported and actually transplanted. This review focuses on postdonation challenges and opportunities to increase the number of transplants through improved organ utilization. RECENT FINDINGS:We build upon recently proposed changes in terminology for measuring organ utilization. Among organs recovered for transplant, the nonuse rate (NUR REC ) has risen above 25% for kidneys and pancreata. Among donors, the nonuse rate (NUR DON ) has risen to 40% for livers and exceeds 70% for thoracic organs. Programme-level variation in offer acceptance rates vastly exceeds variation in the traditional, 1-year survival benchmark. Key opportunities to boost utilization include donation after circulatory death and hepatitis C virus (HCV)+ organs; acute kidney injury and suboptimal biopsy kidneys; older and steatotic livers. SUMMARY:Underutilization of less-than-ideal, yet transplant-worthy organs remains an obstacle to maximizing the impact of the U.S. transplant system. The increased risk of inferior posttransplant outcomes must always be weighed against the risks of remaining on the waitlist. Advanced perfusion technologies; tuning allocation systems for placement efficiency; and data-driven clinical decision support have the potential to increase utilization of medically complex organs.